[Surrey] Park Avenue | 124m & 118m | 36 & 40 Floors | Complete - Page 27

Rico · #**521** Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 8:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by osirisboy

Wow. Suburban wasteland.

Patience, growing up it was not a great place but it seems to have finally hit its critical mass...and of course the view would be more urban looking from Park Place to Central.

osirisboy · #**522** Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 8:24 PM**

Another 20 years maybe

officedweller · #**523** Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 9:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by osirisboy

Wow. Suburban wasteland.

You could look at pics of Downtown South from 1980s and say the same thing - lots of parking lots.

LeftCoaster · #**524** Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 10:49 PM**

Some see suburban wasteland, some see a field of potential.

Shift · #**525** Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 11:10 PM**

Suburban centre in transition. I've been through many parts of Toronto that would be considered run-down 'Suburban Wastelands'. Surrey is quite high quality and fairly compact in comparison.

I'm pretty sure Suburban Wasteland is a term typically used to describe to far-flung, sprawling, low-density areas with freeways and huge interchanges in-between. Since there is significant density in this area, and fairly compact development, it's clearly not a Suburban Wasteland.

osirisboy · #**526** Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 11:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

You could look at pics of Downtown South from 1980s and say the same thing - lots of parking lots.

I would call that an urban wasteland.

And yeah I see Surrey as a suburban wasteland, just my impression. Yes city hall and library are great but having a couple of good projects doesn't change my perception. Things like the infinity buildings or the rcmp building or the mall are examples of the suburban feel I get. So. Yes I see lots of potential but that doesn't change my impression of it at this point in time

And shift you just described Surrey!!! Haha

artmarkii · #**527** Posted **Feb 11, 2016, 2:53 AM**

I did a mock up of how PA would look approximately when finished based on Shift's photo. Gotta say, I wish there was a bit more of a variation in height like in downtown Coquitlam. The cluster of such similar towers do look a little out of place within the backdrop of the surrounding environment.

Shift · #**528** Posted **Feb 11, 2016, 4:24 AM**

Nice render! Thanks.

It does look like an out of place bulky mass all at that height, but eventually that entire cluster will be a peak. The area between King George Station and the hospital will begin to fill in over the next 10 years to be a continuous built-up urban area, with heights stepping downward.

Shift · #**529** Posted **Feb 11, 2016, 4:28 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by osirisboy

And shift you just described Surrey!!! Haha

Try being knowledgable on a topic before commenting. Surrey is developing rather densely in new areas with RF-12, RF-10 sized lots and RM densities becoming very common. Hardly 'wasteland' sprawl in a 'large lot, freeway bi-sected, americanized outer-suburb' sense.

officedweller · #**530** Posted **Feb 11, 2016, 4:29 AM**

Nice job.

osirisboy · #**531** Posted **Feb 11, 2016, 6:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shift

Try being knowledgable on a topic before commenting. Surrey is developing rather densely in new areas with RF-12, RF-10 sized lots and RM densities becoming very common. Hardly 'wasteland' sprawl in a 'large lot, freeway bi-sected, americanized outer-suburb' sense.

Lmao. Loosen up. The pic posted gives me an impression of a wasteland. Period It's the feeling I have. It's not an issue of "knowledge"
What you described as suburban wasteland fits the majority of Surrey, in general.

artmarkii · #**532** Posted **Feb 11, 2016, 8:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shift

Nice render! Thanks.

It does look like an out of place bulky mass all at that height, but eventually that entire cluster will be a peak. The area between King George Station and the hospital will begin to fill in over the next 10 years to be a continuous built-up urban area, with heights stepping downward.

You're welcome Shift. I sure am looking forward to that area filling in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

Nice job.

Thanks!

artmarkii · #**533** Posted **Feb 11, 2016, 8:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by osirisboy

Lmao. Loosen up. The pic posted gives me an impression of a wasteland. Period It's the feeling I have. It's not an issue of "knowledge"
What you described as suburban wasteland fits the majority of Surrey, in general.

I don't entirely find Surrey to give that much of a suburban wasteland feel as a lot of the new developments going up are quite urban indeed (mixed use, underground parking etc.) and most other lower density places around Surrey Central just seem to be land that have a lot of potential or are stores and shops.

For some reason I would actually find some places in Mississauga to be worst, and give me more of a "suburban wasteland" feel. With hardly any pedestrian friendly features, stores, and vast distances just doesn't really seem inviting to walk there.

Credit to: Tamara Bangura, http://winthehumanrace.ca/mississauga-is-home-to-71-fortune-500-companies/

Shift · #**534** Posted **Feb 11, 2016, 6:54 PM**

Surrey and Mississauga are night and day.

Mississauga City Centre is very spread out with wide streets, wide boulevards, and buildings that don't meet the street in a pedestrian friendly way.

Surrey City Centre is much more compact in comparison, and the surrounding area is more of an urban grid. It also has rapid transit which Mississauga is lacking.

It's quite clear to see the difference.

MCC:

SCC:

Shift · #**535** Posted **Feb 11, 2016, 7:10 PM**

The Suburban Wasteland of MCC for comparison:

The original Infinity towers, as bad as they are, are better than this. Even King George Highway looks good in comparison.

artmarkii · #**536** Posted **Feb 11, 2016, 10:31 PM**

I totally agree with you Shift. Surrey is way better in terms of it's "urbaness" compared to Mississauga, despite it having more high rise residential and office buildings. Heck from the Google Maps satellite images you posted, even the out lying "suburban" parts of the area are more dense in Surrey.

Honestly a lot of those high rises in Mississauga are just corporate offices with huge surface parking lots and lots of empty space. Residential towers there are also set back far from the streets. It kinda gives me the feel of Annacis Island and not an urban centre. King George Boulevard does look good in comparison.

Just take a look at this video driving through "Downtown Mississauga"
https://youtu.be/6Rrb0h-n2xk

Anyways, I sure hope The Hub at King George Stations gets built ASAP

And even though PA and PP has so much low density land surrounding it, within the development it self it looks incredibly dense. It's also right beside rapid transit too!

osirisboy · #**537** Posted **Feb 11, 2016, 10:45 PM**

Personally, Both look pretty bad to me!! And just goes to show having high density projects doesn't make it any less of a suburban wasteland.

Shift · #**538** Posted **Feb 12, 2016, 1:13 AM**

So by your logic, everything in Metro Vancouver outside of the downtown core is a suburban wasteland, because it's pretty much similar densities and built form throughout the region.

osirisboy · #**539** Posted **Feb 12, 2016, 1:31 AM**

Yeah I'm not arguing this with you. The picture posted looks like a suburban wasteland (to me) Period!

officedweller · #**540** Posted **Feb 12, 2016, 2:17 AM**

Just a side note that I think some of the posted pics of Mississauga show Hurontario St - which has a wide right-of-way reserved for an LRT line (i.e the grass to the side).